Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:10 PM Feb 2019

If Sanders not being officially in the party bothers Democrats so much

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Yonnie3 (a host of the General Discussion forum).

then they won't vote for him in the primaries.

See? The problem solves itself.

187 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If Sanders not being officially in the party bothers Democrats so much (Original Post) ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 OP
They didn't mind when Charlie Crist was a 3rd party candidate for the Senate race in 2010. nt RandiFan1290 Feb 2019 #1
Or Joe Lieberman ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #9
and apparently they don't care much about Bloomberg... shanny Feb 2019 #17
I was also taken aback by that. Also by Lieberman's enormous ego. ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #21
I remember most people here Trumpocalypse Feb 2019 #93
Likewise Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Feb 2019 #119
Lieberman's name makes my blood boil. dem4decades Feb 2019 #152
What was your username here, back then? nt Snotcicles Feb 2019 #170
Why do you ask? Trumpocalypse Feb 2019 #172
I don't think Charlie Christ had a major hand in handing the presidency to Donnie Short Fingers maxrandb Feb 2019 #65
Bernie didn't lose to trump. nt RandiFan1290 Feb 2019 #81
Nor cause anyone else to lose to Trump. zentrum Feb 2019 #106
True but he stayed in way longer than necessary and that was not helpful. That hurt the Democrats. UniteFightBack Feb 2019 #155
Think about why Sanders did that. He knew he couldn't win. He probably knew ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #165
No he was trying to win the nomination. The whole delegate bullshit...remember? nt UniteFightBack Feb 2019 #166
That's it. And zentrum Feb 2019 #178
Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2019 #121
Who is "they"? And what does a 3rd party candidate have to do with Sanders? Honeycombe8 Feb 2019 #74
When Sanders entered the race his position was very little different than Trump. olegramps Feb 2019 #98
Supporting Crist was a strategic move to stop Rubio. honest.abe Feb 2019 #122
The problem is that he doesn't stop, even when he loses, and his supporters rally against the party LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #2
+100 Sneederbunk Feb 2019 #4
Bullshit!!! Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #7
You have a selective memory; there are a number of current posters who flat out stated LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #11
PUMAS in 2008 Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #15
What about them? Clinton worked tirelessly, from the time that Obama won the primaries LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #18
...and they REFUSED to vote for Obama. Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #22
+1000000! SammyWinstonJack Feb 2019 #25
Without your continued use of unsupported allegations, you have so very little... LanternWaste Feb 2019 #52
+∞ LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #58
Show me PUMAs who voted for Obama... Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #59
Google it... Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #141
Got a whole website full of them, what was it called... namahage Feb 2019 #68
. Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #70
I also don't remember Clinton calling for someone to primary Obama. MrsCoffee Feb 2019 #28
Obama invited HRC to discuss how she could KPN Feb 2019 #120
I'm not sure what you mean by reach out? MrsCoffee Feb 2019 #158
Key word: finally. Read between the lines. KPN Feb 2019 #168
You read between the lines. That article was written before the convention. MrsCoffee Feb 2019 #169
Really? Ignore the facts if you wish. Before the KPN Feb 2019 #171
Really. MrsCoffee Feb 2019 #175
Ikr.. unbelievable! Cha Feb 2019 #135
You've missed two important points. thesquanderer Feb 2019 #115
Hillary admitted she could not win but needed some time to decide how to bow out gracefully. honest.abe Feb 2019 #123
But not long before, she "vowed to take the fight to the nominating convention" thesquanderer Feb 2019 #129
Which she didnt. honest.abe Feb 2019 #139
I've said nothing negative about Hillary. thesquanderer Feb 2019 #154
Then President Obama did Cha Feb 2019 #136
Uh, no LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #128
re: "in 2008, Sanders endorsed Obama right away, even before Clinton conceded" thesquanderer Feb 2019 #179
Oh, BS; the point is that he changed his tune when it appplied to him: LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #181
Bullshit about talking about "her emails" LiberalLovinLug Feb 2019 #131
Again, wrong emails. He didn't care about the email server issue, but the DNC strategy ones. LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #133
Are you purposely muddying up the issues? LiberalLovinLug Feb 2019 #138
No, I'm recalling exactly what happened from the time Clinton won a delegate majority LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #142
Sure okay. Us and them. LiberalLovinLug Feb 2019 #146
OK LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #151
Thank's for that link! It proves my point. LiberalLovinLug Feb 2019 #156
Thanks for calling out the revisionist history. R B Garr Feb 2019 #159
Amen. shanny Feb 2019 #19
I don't recall PUMAs crashing the convention in 2008 musicblind Feb 2019 #29
I do... it was extremely contentious up to the roll call Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #37
Clinton did it right away; Sanders waited until the last minute. As to the "contentious convention LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #67
There were a number of states... Catch2.2 Feb 2019 #116
Sanders was eliminated early on. That is just a fact. R B Garr Feb 2019 #157
Or planning a "far-a-thon" LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #42
I guess "what aboutism" isn't confined to just Trumpists. louis c Feb 2019 #77
No, no false equivalencies involved Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #82
I had a big problem with the PUMAS in 08 Trumpocalypse Feb 2019 #96
Because Obama lead McCain by 10 points (give or take a few) Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #97
Could be. Trumpocalypse Feb 2019 #126
...ask the PUMAs who they voted for in 2K8 Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #130
Agreed Trumpocalypse Feb 2019 #132
The PUMAS were racists and likely supported by RW operatives. honest.abe Feb 2019 #118
Now you're just deflecting.. not working. Cha Feb 2019 #134
Apparently so, or you wouldn't have replied? Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #137
BS is being vetted like Cha Feb 2019 #140
--- lapucelle Feb 2019 #20
I'll bet that very few of them were Democrats ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #23
Unconfirmed twitter account? Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #26
... lapucelle Feb 2019 #41
That made all the difference in the world! Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #43
"Defectors" zipplewrath Feb 2019 #48
That's a good argument for closed primaries. N/T lapucelle Feb 2019 #55
Yup zipplewrath Feb 2019 #60
Open primaries give Republicans an opportunity to meddler lapucelle Feb 2019 #61
Among other things zipplewrath Feb 2019 #63
Odd you hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself to. LanternWaste Feb 2019 #57
I wouldn't be surprised if those numbers were correct Progressive dog Feb 2019 #40
The historical record is different LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #30
Google PUMA 2008... Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #38
I remember the PUMAs well. Two points make them irrelevant LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #44
so people who were Sanders delegates ended up supporting Trump ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #46
A large number of them publicly said they'd vote for Stein, which has the same effect LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #54
Even more anecdotal (alleged) evidence LanternWaste Feb 2019 #50
Well, I personally know quite a few in real life who wrote in Bernie. yardwork Feb 2019 #72
Had nothing to do with a lack of campaigning in the rust belt? Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #73
Actually, no. These are highly educated people. They don't need campaign rallies to vote. yardwork Feb 2019 #148
But her Pumas! MyNameGoesHere Feb 2019 #92
Thank you! Catch2.2 Feb 2019 #114
my sense (not backed by data at the moment) is that Sanders supporters who were Democrats ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #16
Every single one I knew did... Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #27
me as well. Most of the people I knew weren't for Sanders because he was anti-establishment ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #33
So did I. nt Stellar Feb 2019 #45
Also without generous media support from Russia LakeArenal Feb 2019 #32
I'm sure that a well past retirement age Progressive dog Feb 2019 #36
Very true. redstatebluegirl Feb 2019 #75
+1000. Paladin Feb 2019 #79
not true at all garybeck Feb 2019 #100
Yup!! Lots of great candidates ..not BS Thekaspervote Feb 2019 #107
That was the point I was about to make Soph0571 Feb 2019 #113
Your failure to address the actual campaign of the actual Democratic candidate is exhausting. OrwellwasRight Feb 2019 #153
+1. Look all over social media, many are toxic. radius777 Feb 2019 #173
It bothers Democrats here on DU. irresistable Feb 2019 #3
I've noticed the same ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #6
I'd pretend it's fear as well... LanternWaste Feb 2019 #10
+1 LongtimeAZDem Feb 2019 #14
Most ... WHO !? tia uponit7771 Feb 2019 #49
Apparently you don't know them. irresistable Feb 2019 #85
Not in MY real world. revmclaren Feb 2019 #88
if the label is more important than what's inside the package ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #105
I've seen what's in the Sanders package.... revmclaren Feb 2019 #163
That is my guess too Catch2.2 Feb 2019 #117
+1 OrwellwasRight Feb 2019 #180
Sanders should definitely be in the primaries forklift Feb 2019 #5
A new aspect? BannonsLiver Feb 2019 #8
But Pelosi needed to go because we needed "new blood" Empowerer Feb 2019 #31
Well said. BannonsLiver Feb 2019 #34
Seems to me that every Liberal I know, self included... tkmorris Feb 2019 #62
How do you define "political establishment"? Empowerer Feb 2019 #66
Old resentments die hard... SoFlaDem Feb 2019 #12
Well said Bradshaw3 Feb 2019 #71
Why do they worry about whether they are welcomed or not? treestar Feb 2019 #161
Should and will are two different things... SoFlaDem Feb 2019 #185
The issue is while he is in the primaries...some damage could be done to both the party and the Demsrule86 Feb 2019 #13
bernie is NOT A DEMOCRAT!!! HE should not be allowed to run or participate in debates trueblue2007 Feb 2019 #24
tell it to the national party ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #35
Expecting candidates who are Democrats to run in the Democratic primary isn't "rigging the rules". TwilightZone Feb 2019 #53
I mean, really. +10000. Expecting someone to be a member of the party.... Honeycombe8 Feb 2019 #78
then it should be easy to get that change made ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #104
It's already in the rules. If he doesn't declare himself a Democrat, run as a Democrat, and.... George II Feb 2019 #89
Page 9, Article VI lapucelle Feb 2019 #127
taxes please ! stonecutter357 Feb 2019 #39
I agree nt Andy823 Feb 2019 #56
One imagines joining the Democratic party would also resulting in 'solving itself' LanternWaste Feb 2019 #47
write him a sincere letter explaining why he should do that ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #51
I sincerely hope - OhZone Feb 2019 #64
We don't want to hear him whining like last time, when he lost. dubyadiprecession Feb 2019 #69
Can one be "unofficially" registered as a Democrat? I did not know that. nt Honeycombe8 Feb 2019 #76
I live in Illinois. dogman Feb 2019 #99
He needs to run as an independent kimbutgar Feb 2019 #80
Bingo. Why should I support this leech? I have many DEM candidates to choose from. nt SylviaD Feb 2019 #87
Not a good idea tazkcmo Feb 2019 #144
But he's not a Democrat but an independent. kimbutgar Feb 2019 #162
I understand that. tazkcmo Feb 2019 #174
If he does run as an Independent then his name will become Nader part 2 kimbutgar Feb 2019 #184
So he's damned if he does tazkcmo Feb 2019 #186
The Democratic Primaries forum are open ! stonecutter357 Feb 2019 #83
Doesn't bother me. it will sort itself out. he'll run as a dem Kurt V. Feb 2019 #84
Bernie should NOT run. I will be voting for and supporting DEMOCRATS nt SylviaD Feb 2019 #86
He caucuses with the Democrats. He votes against Trump/GOP legislation more than many Democrats. pampango Feb 2019 #90
the Bernie Bots went live on Reddit yesterday.. Terminally_Chill Feb 2019 #91
Good point.... Chakaconcarne Feb 2019 #94
The DNC passed a rule last summer that only Dems can run hughee99 Feb 2019 #95
then the issue is solved ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #102
Right, if the name means more to you than the substance . . don't vote for him. Easy peasy. pdsimdars Feb 2019 #101
thank you ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #103
Wow! Thanks for the tip! NastyRiffraff Feb 2019 #108
Democrats are the Big Tent Party, I thought? (long post) CTAtheist Feb 2019 #109
good post ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #111
Just like they didn't last time. Chicago1980 Feb 2019 #110
Does he want to divide the Democrats or have someone beat Trump? LisaM Feb 2019 #112
Independent in the General ?? krkaufman Feb 2019 #125
I could see Sanders staging a third-party run if he doesn't win. LisaM Feb 2019 #147
Bernie has said numerous times he will not EVER run for President as an Independent earthshine Feb 2019 #164
Splitting democratic votes is likely why Trump appeared to be gracious when no_hypocrisy Feb 2019 #176
What are you for?!? krkaufman Feb 2019 #124
Explain your position first before demanding others declare theirs. Dennis Donovan Feb 2019 #143
I am a Democrat sdfernando Feb 2019 #145
Yep! I'm with you 100%. Little Star Feb 2019 #149
That's exactly the same as every other candidate ProfessorPlum Feb 2019 #150
I don't see it that way sdfernando Feb 2019 #167
Here are the DNC rule and oath Gothmog Feb 2019 #160
That might be logical if there were no open primaries. MrsCoffee Feb 2019 #177
Agreed MaryMagdaline Feb 2019 #182
sanders has not yet signed the oath Gothmog Feb 2019 #183
Locking ... Yonnie3 Feb 2019 #187

RandiFan1290

(6,283 posts)
1. They didn't mind when Charlie Crist was a 3rd party candidate for the Senate race in 2010. nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:12 PM
Feb 2019

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
9. Or Joe Lieberman
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:16 PM
Feb 2019

in the Lieberman party

 

shanny

(6,709 posts)
17. and apparently they don't care much about Bloomberg...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:24 PM
Feb 2019

p.s. Ds endorsing Lieberman over the primary winner in their own party was effing DISGUSTING

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
21. I was also taken aback by that. Also by Lieberman's enormous ego.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:27 PM
Feb 2019

But it does bring up that a different axis from right-left, conservative to progressive, is pro-establishment and anti-establishment.

Too many D's were more pro-establishment than they were pro-party in the case of Lieberman and Lamont.

 

Trumpocalypse

(6,143 posts)
93. I remember most people here
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:07 PM
Feb 2019

had a big problem with Lieberman.

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(109,634 posts)
119. Likewise
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:25 PM
Feb 2019

That's my memory.

dem4decades

(11,375 posts)
152. Lieberman's name makes my blood boil.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:16 PM
Feb 2019
 

Snotcicles

(9,089 posts)
170. What was your username here, back then? nt
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 12:09 AM
Feb 2019
 

Trumpocalypse

(6,143 posts)
172. Why do you ask?
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 02:01 AM
Feb 2019

maxrandb

(15,567 posts)
65. I don't think Charlie Christ had a major hand in handing the presidency to Donnie Short Fingers
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:18 PM
Feb 2019

or helped shepherd in this shit-show.

Every time Donnie Shit for Brains nominates a young, white, racist, corporatist Federalist Society nutjob to the federal bench for a lifetime appointment...should we give just a little thanks to Bernie?

RandiFan1290

(6,283 posts)
81. Bernie didn't lose to trump. nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:52 PM
Feb 2019

zentrum

(9,866 posts)
106. Nor cause anyone else to lose to Trump.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:34 PM
Feb 2019
 

UniteFightBack

(8,231 posts)
155. True but he stayed in way longer than necessary and that was not helpful. That hurt the Democrats.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:28 PM
Feb 2019

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
165. Think about why Sanders did that. He knew he couldn't win. He probably knew
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 10:22 PM
Feb 2019

he couldn't win when he got in.

My theory is that he began and continued his campaign not to win the nomination, but to spread his ideas. his policies are what are important for the American people to hear about, so that they know that things can change and get better for people.

If you look at his campaign as a way to broadcast his policies, it makes a lot of sense. The same way that Howard Dean got into the race in 2004 because he wanted to get a conversation going about healthcare.

Knowing Sanders' policies for years, hearing him on Brunch with Bernie discussing the economic policies that will get this country back on its feet, you know that the last thing he wanted was to help Rump in any way.

 

UniteFightBack

(8,231 posts)
166. No he was trying to win the nomination. The whole delegate bullshit...remember? nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 10:24 PM
Feb 2019

zentrum

(9,866 posts)
178. That's it. And
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 08:35 AM
Feb 2019

...he was successful. Many of his lifelong policies are now the Democratic platform.

But he's a convenient scapegoat.

Response to maxrandb (Reply #65)

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
74. Who is "they"? And what does a 3rd party candidate have to do with Sanders?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:47 PM
Feb 2019

Are you acknowledging that Sanders is a third party candidate?

olegramps

(8,200 posts)
98. When Sanders entered the race his position was very little different than Trump.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:20 PM
Feb 2019

Clinton was running against an imposter that was running as a Democrat that has never belonged to the party. Tell me what is the difference between Sanders position on tariffs than Trumps and which are destroying the economy? What are Sander's accomplishments; a couple of post offices renamed. His bills never garnered any support because they never had a ghost of a chance of being passed. He is crowing about the his support for a higher minimum wage which far many others long before him had called for and actually got enacted into law. If you what to see what real Democrats accomplished look at what the GI Bill did for retuning veterans, the 4o hour work week, child labor laws, compulsory education, unionization, etc. His track record is zero. He is just a bag of hot air and no substance.

honest.abe

(8,710 posts)
122. Supporting Crist was a strategic move to stop Rubio.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:28 PM
Feb 2019

It could have worked had there been full cooperation from all Dems. Crist would have caucused with the Dems.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
2. The problem is that he doesn't stop, even when he loses, and his supporters rally against the party
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:13 PM
Feb 2019

At least, that's what happened last time.


Edited to add:

If he were to bow out when mathematically eliminated and actively support Democrats, and rally his followers to do so, I'd be thrilled to see him in our race. But that is not his track record.

Sneederbunk

(14,427 posts)
4. +100
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:13 PM
Feb 2019

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
7. Bullshit!!!
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:16 PM
Feb 2019

EVERY SINGLE Sanders supporter I knew (and everyone else here) supported and voted for Hillary Clinton. Let's take about PUMAs in 2008!

Look it u.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
11. You have a selective memory; there are a number of current posters who flat out stated
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:18 PM
Feb 2019

that they would not vote for Clinton.

Sanders DELEGATES were giving interviews at the convention saying they would vote for Stein. We have video.

Stop trying to erase history.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
15. PUMAS in 2008
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:20 PM
Feb 2019

No selective memory at all, except on your part, my friend.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
18. What about them? Clinton worked tirelessly, from the time that Obama won the primaries
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:25 PM
Feb 2019

to bring her people over.

In contrast, Sanders said "it's not over, we're taking it to the convention", and kept talking about "her emails" until he grudgingly endorsed her just before the convention.

And, when his supporters walked out after Clinton's nomination, he said nothing.

Night and day, and you know it.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
22. ...and they REFUSED to vote for Obama.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:29 PM
Feb 2019

I know not of a SINGLE Sanders' supporter who pledged not to vote for Hillary in 2016. Not. A. One. (Except for "Bernie Bros" believers. Boy, FSB hit a home run that day...&quot .

What really sucks is that some here are still believing this nonsense.

SammyWinstonJack

(44,131 posts)
25. +1000000!
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:32 PM
Feb 2019
 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
52. Without your continued use of unsupported allegations, you have so very little...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:53 PM
Feb 2019

Without your continued use of unsupported allegations, you'd have so very little substantive evidence. I can see why you rely on them so consistently.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
58. +∞
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:56 PM
Feb 2019

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
59. Show me PUMAs who voted for Obama...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:56 PM
Feb 2019

Oy vey, done with the 2016 warriors...

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
141. Google it...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:19 PM
Feb 2019

Do your own work on whether Clinton supporters went south in 2008. It happened and I was there...

namahage

(1,157 posts)
68. Got a whole website full of them, what was it called...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:33 PM
Feb 2019

Juveniles Playing Revolutionaries?
Jerks, Primarily Republican?
Jokers Paid in Rubles?

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
70. .
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:36 PM
Feb 2019

MrsCoffee

(5,803 posts)
28. I also don't remember Clinton calling for someone to primary Obama.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:34 PM
Feb 2019

It is night and day.

There is a great effort being made to pretend Bernie Bros never existed. Great effort being made to pretend Bernie didn't drag things out way after he had no chance of winning. Telling us not to believe our own eyes and ears.

I'm done with that kind of propaganda being thrown around.

KPN

(15,741 posts)
120. Obama invited HRC to discuss how she could
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:25 PM
Feb 2019

be involved in the platform, the convention, campaign, and the administration early after the outcome became obvious. He reached out with a carrot. Perhaps my memory is faulty, but I don’t remember her doing that same thing early. Didn’t she actually strike an opposite tone? That’s kind of what I recall. But maybe it’s a relative or biased perspective on my part. Correct me with the facts if I am wrong.

Let’s be clear. I am not trying to refight the 16 primary here. Just providing some clarifying and possibly mitigating contextual perspective.

MrsCoffee

(5,803 posts)
158. I'm not sure what you mean by reach out?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:39 PM
Feb 2019

This wasn't good enough?

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/287486-how-bernie-came-to-back-hillary

The coming-together finally occurred after long talks involving Clinton, Sanders and his wife, Jane, as well as top campaign officials on both sides. The negotiations centered on how the two candidates could push forward with an agreed-upon agenda.

A critical moment in the process, Clinton aides said Tuesday, was the meeting between the two candidates last month at the Washington Hilton. The talk helped to break the ice, with Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver and Clinton counterpart Robby Mook lingering at the hotel for another two hours.

In the weeks after that initial meeting, Mook and Weaver continued the discussion in a string of calls and text messages. Last month, they had a one-on-one dinner at the Farmhouse Tap and Grill in Burlington, Vt., one Clinton aide said.

Over a burger for Weaver and a salad for Mook, they discussed issues including Sanders’s tuition-free college proposal. They were interrupted several times by diners asking to take selfies with Weaver, the Clinton aide said. The dinner meeting went well into the night, lasting until about 11 p.m.

KPN

(15,741 posts)
168. Key word: finally. Read between the lines.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 11:58 PM
Feb 2019

MrsCoffee

(5,803 posts)
169. You read between the lines. That article was written before the convention.
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 12:02 AM
Feb 2019

And the two had met the month before that.

But color me surprised that you would find something to pick at.



KPN

(15,741 posts)
171. Really? Ignore the facts if you wish. Before the
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 12:37 AM
Feb 2019

convention is vastly different from months before.

MrsCoffee

(5,803 posts)
175. Really.
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 06:25 AM
Feb 2019

Cha

(299,518 posts)
135. Ikr.. unbelievable!
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:11 PM
Feb 2019

thesquanderer

(12,066 posts)
115. You've missed two important points.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:19 PM
Feb 2019

1. Clinton did not immediately concede once Obama had the required 2118 delegates.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24953561/ns/politics-decision_08/t/clinton-refuses-concede-nomination/

2. Sanders didn't "keep talking about her emails" - quite the contrary.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/664591/bernie-sanders-still-doesnt-care-about-hillarys-damn-emails-says-media-shouldnt-have-either

honest.abe

(8,710 posts)
123. Hillary admitted she could not win but needed some time to decide how to bow out gracefully.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:42 PM
Feb 2019
According to an NBC News source, Clinton said if Obama were to ask her to be on the ticket, she would be interested.

"I am open to it," Clinton replied, if it would help the party's prospects in November.

Clinton also told colleagues the delegate math was not there for her to overtake Obama, but that she wanted to take time to determine how to leave the race in a way that would best help Democrats.

"I deserve some time to get this right," she said, even as the other lawmakers forcefully argued for her to press Obama to choose her as his running mate.

thesquanderer

(12,066 posts)
129. But not long before, she "vowed to take the fight to the nominating convention"
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:54 PM
Feb 2019

honest.abe

(8,710 posts)
139. Which she didnt.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:17 PM
Feb 2019

What are so intent on vilifying Hillary?

thesquanderer

(12,066 posts)
154. I've said nothing negative about Hillary.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:25 PM
Feb 2019

I just don't elevate her above Bernie.

Neither was a perfect candidate. Either would have been a fine president.

Cha

(299,518 posts)
136. Then President Obama did
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:14 PM
Feb 2019

ask her 3 times to be SOS and she said yes!

And, she did an excellent job

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
128. Uh, no
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:53 PM
Feb 2019

1. Clinton conceded four days later. Sanders took a month, during which he continued to attack Clinton

2. Wrong emails; I'm talking about the "DNC rigged it for Clinton" ones. both he and his followers kept those very much front and center.


A quick side note on point one: in 2008, Sanders endorsed Obama right away, even before Clinton conceded. He didn't have a problem with the superdelegates then:

In ‘08, Sanders Endorsed Obama – Before Clinton Formally Exited Race

thesquanderer

(12,066 posts)
179. re: "in 2008, Sanders endorsed Obama right away, even before Clinton conceded"
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 09:12 AM
Feb 2019

as did many other people. But it's refreshing to see someone complain that Sanders supported Obama too strongly, since the more common complaint is that he supported Obama too weakly.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
181. Oh, BS; the point is that he changed his tune when it appplied to him:
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 09:52 AM
Feb 2019
But Sanders struck a different tone in 2008, when he told his hometown newspaper, the Burlington Free Press in Vermont, that he planned to “play a very active role” in supporting Obama.

“I will do everything I can to see that he is elected president,” he said at the time.

That interview was published on June 5, 2008, two days after the last Democratic contests but two days before Clinton suspended her campaign.

The story also noted that “Sanders said he held off supporting either of the Democrats because he has made it a custom not to support any Democrat for the presidential nomination until the party had chosen its nominee.”

At that point, however, Obama had 1,766.5 pledged delegates and Clinton had 1,639.5, according to data from RealClearPolitics. In 2008, 2,118 total delegates were required to secure the nomination.


So, in 2008, he considered Obama's primary total, minus the superdelegates, to signify that the party had chosen its nominee.

Sanders takes different position on superdelegates than he did in 2008

LiberalLovinLug

(14,219 posts)
131. Bullshit about talking about "her emails"
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:01 PM
Feb 2019

He tirelessly and endlessly was poked and prodded by the MSM to attack Hillary on the emails, and he refused.

Or Benghazi or Whitewater, or any of the fake news about Hillary. Why?....because there were plenty of other actual issues he wanted to run FOR not AGAINST. In fact he was clearly visably upset every time a reporter would attempt to make him react negatively to the emails.

Its one of the reasons that Sanders gets so much respect around here. Its about his policies, his ideas, not wasting time whining about fake scandals.

The only, ONLY, time there was ever a hint at criticism was when a reporter confronted him with an official report by the State Department’s inspector general, that was critical of Clinton's use of her server, and said, not surprisingly, that people would have to take a hard look at it that development. That was the only instance, and after that I believe Hillary admitted her carelessness and apologized. After which Bernie never brought it up again.

http://time.com/4351525/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-emails-superdelegates/

The Vermont senator, who has refrained from attacking his opponent on the email scandal on the campaign trail, mentioned the Thursday report by the State Department’s inspector general during a Sunday appearance on CBS’ Face the Nation. The inspector general concluded that Clinton and her senior aides ignored repeated warnings that her private email system was vulnerable to hackers when she was Secretary of State.

“It was not a good report for Secretary Clinton,” Sanders said. “That is something that the American people, Democrats and delegates are going to have to take a hard look at.”



And why can't he go to the convention? It was not breaking any rules. That was his right. In fact, it was a success in that Hillary was forced to have a more progressive platform with some of Sanders policies included.

The "Bernie Bros" were a Putin troll invention. Sad that even some DUers fell for it.

Look, in simplistic terms, there was a majority of Sanders supporters that were Democrats first. This was that 48% he had of support just before it all crashed for good in California. Then he also had a lot of independents and probably even a few disgruntled R's. The first group overwhelmingly followed Bernies lead and voted for Hillary. The second group never were going to vote for Hillary anyways....so there was no net loss of votes.

Now if Sanders would have won the primaries, he would have held that support. And would also have taking the Rust Belt states who sided with him on the trade deals. As well, Putin and the GOP would have had a more limited time to pivot to smearing him before the election. And right now we wouldn't be suffering with Trump.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
133. Again, wrong emails. He didn't care about the email server issue, but the DNC strategy ones.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:04 PM
Feb 2019

There are a lot of people here trying to pretend that June 2016 didn't happen.

LiberalLovinLug

(14,219 posts)
138. Are you purposely muddying up the issues?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:16 PM
Feb 2019

The term "her emails" heard by any person even mildly politically aware would interpret that as the trouble Hillary got into involving the email usage of a private server while she was SoS. Which was criticized by her own department investigators. To which she apologized for.


To say that you meant "her emails" to mean the hacking of the DNC server emails, involving not Hillary as much as DWS and others in the DNC and their bias and machinations against Sanders? As Donna Brazile laid it out? Quite the stretch. And besides....WHY WOULDN'T HE BE PISSED ABOUT THAT? I thought he was way too nice about it personally.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
142. No, I'm recalling exactly what happened from the time Clinton won a delegate majority
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:21 PM
Feb 2019

until the convention. None of Clinton's enemies split hairs about which issue they slammed her on; it was constant, and brutal, and Sanders was an active participant.

And. as a side note, I am sick of hearing about "DNC bias"; god forbid the Democratic party took steps to nominate a Democrat.

LiberalLovinLug

(14,219 posts)
146. Sure okay. Us and them.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:50 PM
Feb 2019

And the "us" is not D's vs. R's. To you its singularly your own candidate, against everyone else, including other D's, or those that ran as D's with the blessing of the party. Everyone else is the "enemy". And so you lump the most vile Trumpist propagandist like Conway or Hannity with Sanders and anyone one of his supporters at the time, which was as I said 48% of delegates at one time and they haven't gone away. And you pretend in your mind that none of any of those people "split hairs" about any topic or fake news conspiracy theory on Hillary.

If you have any examples of baseless accusations, or piling on by Sanders during that time, on her email scandal or Benghazi or Seth Rich's "murder", or a pizza parlor child sex ring, white water, or anything at all, maybe you should put your pen where your mouth is and put up a link if you want to be taken seriously.

LiberalLovinLug

(14,219 posts)
156. Thank's for that link! It proves my point.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:35 PM
Feb 2019

But you still said "her emails". Who is "her"? Debbie Wasserman Schultz? You must admit that whenever anyone ever referred to "her emails" it was about Clinton's emails, not the DNC, unless you always refer to the DNC organization in the feminine.

And again, thanks for that link. It is a reminder at the incredible restraint of Bernie Sanders response, when he found out. Because he bit his tongue in the interest of the party, and Hillary, winning. which was admirable considering what was said in those emails


Sanders issued a statement Sunday saying Wasserman Schultz "has made the right decision for the future of the Democratic Party."

"While she deserves thanks for her years of service, the party now needs new leadership that will open the doors of the party and welcome in working people and young people," Sanders said. "The party leadership must also always remain impartial in the presidential nominating process, something which did not occur in the 2016 race."

In appearances on talk shows earlier Sunday, Sanders had again called for Wasserman Schultz’s resignation but said Democrats should focus on defeating GOP nominee Donald Trump, whom he called “perhaps the worst Republican candidate that I’ve seen in my lifetime.”

We have to elect Secretary Clinton, who on every single issue — fighting for the middle class, on health care, on climate change — is a far, far superior candidate to Trump,” Sanders said on Meet the Press. “That’s where I think the focus has got to be.

R B Garr

(17,102 posts)
159. Thanks for calling out the revisionist history.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:41 PM
Feb 2019


We all know the facts are that Sanders was eliminated early and the ensuing contentious lingering unnecessary primary and the convention drama damaged our candidate in the general. Those are the facts.
 

shanny

(6,709 posts)
19. Amen.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:25 PM
Feb 2019

musicblind

(4,488 posts)
29. I don't recall PUMAs crashing the convention in 2008
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:34 PM
Feb 2019

And while there, giving public interviews threatening to support Jill Stein.

Two of my best friends voted for Stein because Sanders did not win the nomination. So don't come at me with claims that all Sanders supporters backed Clinton. That's simply not true.

We have videotape and statistics backing that up. There weren't nearly as many PUMAs as there were disgruntled Sanders supporters. You can check my registration date. I was here for both and one did not hold a candle to the other.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
37. I do... it was extremely contentious up to the roll call
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:37 PM
Feb 2019

...but she, to her credit, threw her support to Obama, JUST AS BERNIE did in 2016.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
67. Clinton did it right away; Sanders waited until the last minute. As to the "contentious convention
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:33 PM
Feb 2019
Judging from public opinion polls and my own observations on the convention floor, Clinton's most ardent backers overwhelmingly followed her enthusiastic endorsement of Obama. PUMA's threats never materialized. No Clinton delegates led a walkout during the convention or tried to shout over speakers.



https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2016/7/28/12302406/bernie-or-busters-nothing-like-pumas

Catch2.2

(629 posts)
116. There were a number of states...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:20 PM
Feb 2019

that Bernie won. During the convention, however, the superdelegates went against the will of the people and put their votes towards Hilary. West Virginia is a prime example. Bernie won all the counties yet the superdelegates went for Hilary. Maybe that was why Bernie waited because he needed to see how the superdelegates voted. Maybe he wasn't just being difficult!

R B Garr

(17,102 posts)
157. Sanders was eliminated early on. That is just a fact.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:36 PM
Feb 2019

Neither Obama or Clinton badmouthed Democrats to distinguish themselves. No revisionist history.

 

louis c

(8,652 posts)
77. I guess "what aboutism" isn't confined to just Trumpists.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:50 PM
Feb 2019

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
82. No, no false equivalencies involved
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:53 PM
Feb 2019

I just remember, as an Obama supporter, how ugly things got.

 

Trumpocalypse

(6,143 posts)
96. I had a big problem with the PUMAS in 08
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:10 PM
Feb 2019

But they didn't help elect McCain.

And it is fair to say that Sanders supporters didn't elect Trump.

The problem is Sanders using the resources of a party that he refuses to contribute to.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
97. Because Obama lead McCain by 10 points (give or take a few)
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:15 PM
Feb 2019

Secretary Clinton led TRUMP (of all people) by 2-3 points. Was that all Russia?

 

Trumpocalypse

(6,143 posts)
126. Could be.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:46 PM
Feb 2019

But when 90% of Sanders supporters voted for Clinton, it is hard to blame them for her defeat.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
130. ...ask the PUMAs who they voted for in 2K8
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:00 PM
Feb 2019

All of this, at least from my perspective (Dem OP since 1972/McGovern) is NOT showing party unity, when compared post convention-2008 vs 2016.

 

Trumpocalypse

(6,143 posts)
132. Agreed
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:01 PM
Feb 2019

But Obama won in 08 so the PUMAS didn't matter.

honest.abe

(8,710 posts)
118. The PUMAS were racists and likely supported by RW operatives.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:24 PM
Feb 2019

Nothing to do with the crap Bernie and his gang did in 2016.

Cha

(299,518 posts)
134. Now you're just deflecting.. not working.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:07 PM
Feb 2019

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
137. Apparently so, or you wouldn't have replied?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:14 PM
Feb 2019

Look, Cha. We're on the same side, but just stop bashing Bernie? Every Democratic candidate

(Political
Support Democrats
Do not post support for Republicans or independent/third-party "spoiler" candidates. Do not state that you are not going to vote, or that you will write-in a candidate that is not on the ballot, or that you intend to vote for any candidate other than the official Democratic nominee in any general election where a Democrat is on the ballot. Do not post anything that smears Democrats generally, or that is intended to dissuade people from supporting the Democratic Party or its candidates. Don't argue there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats.
Why we have this rule: Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government, and as such we expect our members to support and vote for Democrats at election time. Rare exceptions are granted at the sole discretion of the DU Administrators. (Current exceptions: None.)

Don't bash Democratic public figures
Do not post disrespectful nicknames, insults, or highly inflammatory attacks against any Democratic public figures. Do not post anything that could be construed as bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for any Democratic general election candidate, and do not compare any Democratic general election candidate unfavorably to their general election opponent(s).
Why we have this rule: Our forum members support and admire a wide variety of Democratic politicians and public figures. Constructive criticism is always welcome, but our members don't expect to see Democrats viciously denigrated on this website. This rule also applies to Independents who align themselves with Democrats (eg: Bernie Sanders) )


...has a shot. Let'a work together, whomever the nominee is?

Cha

(299,518 posts)
140. BS is being vetted like
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:18 PM
Feb 2019

every other Democratic Candidate is.. no exceptions.

You don't have to post the rules for me.. I know them inside out.

lapucelle

(18,745 posts)
20. ---
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:27 PM
Feb 2019

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
23. I'll bet that very few of them were Democrats
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:30 PM
Feb 2019

. . . so, probably not votes that Clinton had a strong change at anyway.

It also implies that the vast majority (80-90%) of Sanders supporters voted for Clinton. So, those numbers kind of cut both ways.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
26. Unconfirmed twitter account?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:32 PM
Feb 2019

C'mon. Each of these posts are bumming the fuck out of me. Like, you didn't notice the ratfuckery of 2016...

And, please post *something* showing Secretary Clinton campaigned hard in PA, MI, WI, but was bested due to misinformation. Please?

lapucelle

(18,745 posts)
41. ...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:44 PM
Feb 2019
The Bernie voters who defected to Trump, explained by a political scientist

In several key states — Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan — the number of Sanders to Trump defectors were greater than Trump’s margin of victory, according to new numbers released Wednesday by UMass professor Brian Schaffner.



https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/24/16194086/bernie-trump-voters-study

Sanders Voters Tipped the Election to Trump

https://politicalwire.com/2017/08/23/sanders-voters-tipped-election-trump/

Bernie Sanders Voters Helped Trump Win and Here's Proof

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

indeed.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
43. That made all the difference in the world!
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:46 PM
Feb 2019

Thanks!

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
48. "Defectors"
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:50 PM
Feb 2019

The name implies that somehow they would have voted for HRC under ANY circumstances. These were most likely the modern day "Reagan Democrats". I don't think HRC ever had a chance with the, regardless of Bernie. They liked Bernie for the same reason they like Trump. Because it pissed off the HRC supporters.

lapucelle

(18,745 posts)
55. That's a good argument for closed primaries. N/T
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:55 PM
Feb 2019

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
60. Yup
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:59 PM
Feb 2019

Of course closed primaries don't give one much suggestion about how they'll do in the general. Open ones give evidence of the ability to attract independents to the candidate.

lapucelle

(18,745 posts)
61. Open primaries give Republicans an opportunity to meddler
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:02 PM
Feb 2019

and the media an opportunity to stoke phony, but lucrative narratives

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
63. Among other things
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:13 PM
Feb 2019

I'm fairly agnostic on the topic because in alot of states one can change their affiliation between the primaries and the general. 'Pubs can meddle anyway. The media always seems to find a way to push their narrative.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
57. Odd you hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself to.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:55 PM
Feb 2019

it's ironic in that your own consistent use of simplistic anecdotal evidence is tempered by your indictments of others doing the same.

Please, indeed...

Progressive dog

(6,947 posts)
40. I wouldn't be surprised if those numbers were correct
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:42 PM
Feb 2019

Trump and the Russians spent a lot of effort pushing for Sanders and against the DEemocratic party.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
38. Google PUMA 2008...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:38 PM
Feb 2019

Selective memory?

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
44. I remember the PUMAs well. Two points make them irrelevant
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:48 PM
Feb 2019

One, Clinton did her best to bring them around, unlike Sanders, and

Two, they didn't lose the election for us.

All your whataboutism doesn't change the fact that Sanders and his followers trashed the Democratic party and helped give us Trump.

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
46. so people who were Sanders delegates ended up supporting Trump
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:50 PM
Feb 2019

is that what you are alleging?

Sure, his delegates were disappointed. Anyone would be.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
54. A large number of them publicly said they'd vote for Stein, which has the same effect
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:54 PM
Feb 2019

They said so, emphatically, on TV. Repeatedly.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
50. Even more anecdotal (alleged) evidence
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:51 PM
Feb 2019

(I'd instruct others to cite my work for me too... but in my case,m it's laziness rather than an inability to support my premise with objective evidence)

yardwork

(62,084 posts)
72. Well, I personally know quite a few in real life who wrote in Bernie.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:45 PM
Feb 2019

They live in college towns in the Midwest. Their votes in the GE definitely helped Trump win. Is that Bernie's fault? Well, I don't feel that he was appropriately supportive of Clinton in the GE.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
73. Had nothing to do with a lack of campaigning in the rust belt?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:46 PM
Feb 2019

yardwork

(62,084 posts)
148. Actually, no. These are highly educated people. They don't need campaign rallies to vote.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:56 PM
Feb 2019

These folks vote regularly. They wouldn't have attended a campaign rally and didn't need one to remind them to vote.

These folks I know were convinced by Bernie's surrogates of a lot of lies about Hillary and the DNC. Blatant, ridiculous lies.

 

MyNameGoesHere

(7,638 posts)
92. But her Pumas!
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:06 PM
Feb 2019

Catch2.2

(629 posts)
114. Thank you!
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:14 PM
Feb 2019

I don't know one Bernie supporter that did not vote for Hilary!

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
16. my sense (not backed by data at the moment) is that Sanders supporters who were Democrats
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:20 PM
Feb 2019

voted for Clinton in the general in large part.

I don't have any numbers on Sanders supporters who were republicans and/or independents originally. Not really sure what those people "should" have done, or whether people on DU have much of a say in that.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
27. Every single one I knew did...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:33 PM
Feb 2019

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
33. me as well. Most of the people I knew weren't for Sanders because he was anti-establishment
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:35 PM
Feb 2019

but rather because he was pro-people. The exact opposite of Trump.

Stellar

(5,644 posts)
45. So did I. nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:48 PM
Feb 2019

LakeArenal

(29,049 posts)
32. Also without generous media support from Russia
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:35 PM
Feb 2019

Progressive dog

(6,947 posts)
36. I'm sure that a well past retirement age
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:37 PM
Feb 2019

senior will not have changed since 2016. His opponents better hope that they've never done anything at all, even running a highly rated charity was used against Hillary.

redstatebluegirl

(12,265 posts)
75. Very true.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:48 PM
Feb 2019

Paladin

(28,420 posts)
79. +1000.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:50 PM
Feb 2019

garybeck

(9,954 posts)
100. not true at all
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:24 PM
Feb 2019

he gracefully gave the nomination to hillary and supported her and encouraged people to vote for her.

stop inciting division for no reason

Thekaspervote

(32,979 posts)
107. Yup!! Lots of great candidates ..not BS
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:34 PM
Feb 2019

Soph0571

(9,685 posts)
113. That was the point I was about to make
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:13 PM
Feb 2019

The way he ran his campaign made sure his most ardent supporters did not show out for the nominee. Unforgivable IMO. And I guarantee he will pull that shit again. It is what a certain generation of 'far' left white men do. I see Bernie and raise you Corbyn. Same shit different country

OrwellwasRight

(5,170 posts)
153. Your failure to address the actual campaign of the actual Democratic candidate is exhausting.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:21 PM
Feb 2019

Let me recommend a book for you so that you can learn that candidates should take some responsibility for their own performance in the election:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01JWDWP6W/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

I learned a lot about the failures of the Clinton campaign from this book. And I learned that the outcome of the general was not "Bernie's fault." I don't see how that helps strengthen our party to keep pretending it was. Let's pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and get ready for 2020.

Please move on from the relentless Bernie Blaming. It's no longer relevant or interesting.

radius777

(3,635 posts)
173. +1. Look all over social media, many are toxic.
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 02:29 AM
Feb 2019

Most Sanders supporters were Dems who voted for Hillary in the GE.

But there is a toxic and vocal element of the populist left which has some degree of crossover with the populist right/Trumpers - and this is evident in their hatred of Dems/Hillary/Obama, hatred for so-called "identity politics", and even outright sexism/racism.

 

irresistable

(989 posts)
3. It bothers Democrats here on DU.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:13 PM
Feb 2019

Out in the real world, most people do like Bernie.

Maybe that is what they fear

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
6. I've noticed the same
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:14 PM
Feb 2019

but it's as if who wins the "DU primary" affects the outside world. Which I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
10. I'd pretend it's fear as well...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:16 PM
Feb 2019

Pretense, not requiring rational thought is much more comforting than analysis.

LongtimeAZDem

(4,494 posts)
14. +1
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:19 PM
Feb 2019

uponit7771

(90,444 posts)
49. Most ... WHO !? tia
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:51 PM
Feb 2019
 

irresistable

(989 posts)
85. Apparently you don't know them.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:56 PM
Feb 2019

revmclaren

(2,611 posts)
88. Not in MY real world.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:59 PM
Feb 2019

In mine, most of my family and friends are voting for a candidate that that is and has been a Democrat during their entire political career.

ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
105. if the label is more important than what's inside the package
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:31 PM
Feb 2019

then by all means vote that way. you are more than entitled to.

revmclaren

(2,611 posts)
163. I've seen what's in the Sanders package....
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 09:41 PM
Feb 2019

No thanks.

ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

Catch2.2

(629 posts)
117. That is my guess too
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:22 PM
Feb 2019

A lot of hate for Bernie on this site. It seems that the candidate that gets attacked the most, also turns out to be the biggest threat.

OrwellwasRight

(5,170 posts)
180. +1
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 09:16 AM
Feb 2019
 

forklift

(401 posts)
5. Sanders should definitely be in the primaries
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:14 PM
Feb 2019

He brings a new aspect to the contest and I am considering voting for him.

BannonsLiver

(16,704 posts)
8. A new aspect?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:16 PM
Feb 2019

He ran last time and has been in congress for 40 years. The bullshit around here sure is getting thick.

Empowerer

(3,900 posts)
31. But Pelosi needed to go because we needed "new blood"
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:34 PM
Feb 2019


The "he's great because he's not ESTABLISHMENT" argument is played out. If you've been in politics for 40 years and are still not part of the "establishment"establishment - you know, been successful in establishing a new way of doing things so that your way is the new "establishment," you haven't been very effective.

Standing outside of the gate yelling may fool some people into thinking you're fighting - but if you've been around this long and are still outside the gate yelling, it's probably time to let someone else lead the fighting (f you ever actually led it at all).

BannonsLiver

(16,704 posts)
34. Well said.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:35 PM
Feb 2019

tkmorris

(11,138 posts)
62. Seems to me that every Liberal I know, self included...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:06 PM
Feb 2019

Has been standing outside the gates yelling at the political establishment since long before I was born. We haven't broken them down yet but that doesn't mean the effects aren't felt, or that we plan to stop anytime soon.

Empowerer

(3,900 posts)
66. How do you define "political establishment"?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:27 PM
Feb 2019
 

SoFlaDem

(98 posts)
12. Old resentments die hard...
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:18 PM
Feb 2019

My concern is that the constant attacks and berating of Sanders and Sander's followers is just likely to push these voters towards the independents because they feel so unwelcomed by the Democrats. I don't think Bernie will get the nomination, and I do think we need his followers if he doesn't.

I personally don't want Bernie to get the nomionation, but I don't want Klobucher either. That will be the last negative you hear me say about either, I just hope everybody focuses on their candidate in the primaries and votes democratic in the end.

Bradshaw3

(7,603 posts)
71. Well said
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:37 PM
Feb 2019

Many won't listen but we need every vote we can get in 2020, not just for the WH but to take the Senate too.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
161. Why do they worry about whether they are welcomed or not?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:44 PM
Feb 2019

Shouldn't they vote as they see their own best interests? It is not a club. It is an organization to try to win elections.

 

SoFlaDem

(98 posts)
185. Should and will are two different things...
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 12:56 PM
Feb 2019

Are you going to hang the taking back of the white house on what people "should" do when they vote? If you think about what you wrote, mine may actually be the more practical approach.

Demsrule86

(69,124 posts)
13. The issue is while he is in the primaries...some damage could be done to both the party and the
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:18 PM
Feb 2019

eventual nominee. His candidacy is very divisive.

trueblue2007

(17,330 posts)
24. bernie is NOT A DEMOCRAT!!! HE should not be allowed to run or participate in debates
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:31 PM
Feb 2019

If he isn't a Democrat, AND STAYS A DEMOCRAT, WE DON'T WANT HIM.

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
35. tell it to the national party
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:37 PM
Feb 2019

if you want them to alter/rig the rules to not let Sanders run.

That's a lot of fear of Sanders and his scary ideas.

TwilightZone

(25,710 posts)
53. Expecting candidates who are Democrats to run in the Democratic primary isn't "rigging the rules".
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:54 PM
Feb 2019

That's a laughable assertion.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
78. I mean, really. +10000. Expecting someone to be a member of the party....
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:50 PM
Feb 2019

when he's running AGAINST members of the party...I mean, how unreasonable can we BE!

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
104. then it should be easy to get that change made
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:29 PM
Feb 2019

please proceed

George II

(67,782 posts)
89. It's already in the rules. If he doesn't declare himself a Democrat, run as a Democrat, and....
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:03 PM
Feb 2019

....should he win serve as a Democrat, he will be shut out of Democratic debates, no support from the Democratic Party, no fundraising by the Democratic Party, etc.

lapucelle

(18,745 posts)
127. Page 9, Article VI
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:49 PM
Feb 2019
The term “presidential candidate” herein shall mean any person who, as determined by the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee,

has accrued delegates in the nominating process and plans to seek the nomination,

has established substantial support for their nomination as the Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United States,

is a bona fide Democrat whose record of public service, accomplishment, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively demonstrates that the candidate is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States,

and will participate in the Convention in good faith

snip=============================================================

At the time a presidential candidate announces their candidacy publicly, they must publicly affirm that they are a Democrat.

Each candidate pursuing the Democratic nomination shall affirm, in writing, to the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee that they:

A. are a member of the Democratic Party;

B. will accept the Democratic nomination;and

C. will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party.

https://www.demrulz.org/wp-content/files/2020_Call_for_the_Convention_12.21.18_w-attachments.pdf

stonecutter357

(12,711 posts)
39. taxes please !
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:40 PM
Feb 2019

Andy823

(11,498 posts)
56. I agree nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:55 PM
Feb 2019
 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
47. One imagines joining the Democratic party would also resulting in 'solving itself'
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:50 PM
Feb 2019

One imagines joining the Democratic party would also resulting in 'solving itself' as well.

But I can certainly understand the reticence to deny more than one solution to your self-defined problem.

If one only has a hammer, nuts and bolts become inconvenient.

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
51. write him a sincere letter explaining why he should do that
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 03:52 PM
Feb 2019

and I'm sure he'll give it the consideration it deserves.

Or, better yet, ask the national party not to let him run. That will prove the inferiority of his ideas.

OhZone

(3,212 posts)
64. I sincerely hope -
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:14 PM
Feb 2019

Democrats avoid infighting, and take the opportunity of using the primaries and debates to take down non-Democrats, like Trump -


















And Bernie.

dubyadiprecession

(5,854 posts)
69. We don't want to hear him whining like last time, when he lost.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:35 PM
Feb 2019

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
76. Can one be "unofficially" registered as a Democrat? I did not know that. nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:48 PM
Feb 2019

dogman

(6,073 posts)
99. I live in Illinois.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:21 PM
Feb 2019

Can you tell me how to register as a Democrat?

kimbutgar

(21,558 posts)
80. He needs to run as an independent
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:51 PM
Feb 2019

Bernie only uses the DemocrTic party. Since he thinks he is idenlent he needs to run as an independent.

SylviaD

(721 posts)
87. Bingo. Why should I support this leech? I have many DEM candidates to choose from. nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:58 PM
Feb 2019

tazkcmo

(7,323 posts)
144. Not a good idea
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:22 PM
Feb 2019


Like it or not, Sen. Sanders is very popular in the real world and I feel comfortable guaranteeing a GOPee victory mo matter who their candidate is.

I am not commenting in any way about the appropriateness or desirability to allow him to run as a Democrat just that if he is to run, and he is, it's best to have him do it as a Democrat so as not to split the liberal vote.

kimbutgar

(21,558 posts)
162. But he's not a Democrat but an independent.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 09:19 PM
Feb 2019

There is an "I " by his name not a "D". Why didn't he change to the Democratic Party after the election. And why did he vote against the Russian sanctions in June of 2017 knowing Russia interfered in the 2016 election? Though I think senators Sanders makes good points I don't feel the Bern like I used to after this vote.

tazkcmo

(7,323 posts)
174. I understand that.
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 05:38 AM
Feb 2019

Would you prefer Drumpf for another four years? That's what you'll get if Sanders runs 3rd party/Indy.

kimbutgar

(21,558 posts)
184. If he does run as an Independent then his name will become Nader part 2
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 12:46 PM
Feb 2019

How many people think positive of Nader nowadays?

tazkcmo

(7,323 posts)
186. So he's damned if he does
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 02:33 PM
Feb 2019

And damned if he doesn't. I'm done.

stonecutter357

(12,711 posts)
83. The Democratic Primaries forum are open !
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:53 PM
Feb 2019

Kurt V.

(5,624 posts)
84. Doesn't bother me. it will sort itself out. he'll run as a dem
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:55 PM
Feb 2019

running as an indy will certainly siphon off votes however.

SylviaD

(721 posts)
86. Bernie should NOT run. I will be voting for and supporting DEMOCRATS nt
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 04:57 PM
Feb 2019

pampango

(24,692 posts)
90. He caucuses with the Democrats. He votes against Trump/GOP legislation more than many Democrats.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:04 PM
Feb 2019

The studies I have seen are that 75% of those who supported him in the 2016 primary ended up voting for Hillary. Would it have been better if the party had excluded him from the primary? There is no guarantee that we would have seen that 75% vote for Hillary in the general election.

If we exclude him this time around, with his proven popularity with many liberal voters (he and his ideas were more of an unknown quantity, at least with me, last time around) and the popularity of the ideas that he ran on last time, there is a risk there.

 

Terminally_Chill

(76 posts)
91. the Bernie Bots went live on Reddit yesterday..
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:05 PM
Feb 2019

Harris seems to be their primary target, O'Rourke their secondary.

Chakaconcarne

(2,501 posts)
94. Good point....
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:07 PM
Feb 2019

but for some reason I don't think that will prevent people here from ripping on him.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
95. The DNC passed a rule last summer that only Dems can run
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:09 PM
Feb 2019

In the Dem presidential primary. If I understand correctly, that means he can’t run unless he becomes an official Dem. It obviously bothered the party leaders enough that they passed the rule.

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
102. then the issue is solved
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:28 PM
Feb 2019
 

pdsimdars

(6,007 posts)
101. Right, if the name means more to you than the substance . . don't vote for him. Easy peasy.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:28 PM
Feb 2019

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
103. thank you
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:29 PM
Feb 2019

it should be as easy as that

NastyRiffraff

(12,448 posts)
108. Wow! Thanks for the tip!
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 05:41 PM
Feb 2019

I never knew I didn't have to vote for Sanders in the primaries! You learn something new every day on DU.

 

CTAtheist

(88 posts)
109. Democrats are the Big Tent Party, I thought? (long post)
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:02 PM
Feb 2019

As long as voter registration determines which Party you belong to, and as long as people can freely change their voter registration, I feel that making a big deal about Bernie being/not being a Democrat is, IMHO, wasted conversation.

For me, a party has a platform, and the party's leadership (generally) supports or believes in that platform. But that doesn't mean every politician running for office registered in that party supports every pillar of that platform 100%. We know of plenty of pro-life Dems, pro-gun Dems, even tax-cut Dems.

When I consider my Vote (tm), I make my decision on a person's positions, not the letter next to their name. Now, we all know there is never going to be an (R) that gets my vote, because there are no pro-choice, gun safety, tax-equality, gender-equality, etc., etc. Republicans. Ever. Like, Never Ever.

But I am not going to rule in, or rule out, a candidate due to a lack of a (D). Again, its just that the ones which have the (D) always align better to my beliefs then any (R) or even any (I) I've ever been presented with as a choice. I really do not care about Bernie's I-D-I-D swapping. Nor do I care about someone's age, race, gender, etc. It's about their positions & policies, period.

I am seeing totally different choices this time around. I will not, CANNOT embrace any kind of "loyalty" to any candidate. Not Bernie, not Hillary, not Biden - no one. Each election is a whole new ball game for me. Not only is the mix of candidates different, but the opponent is different (candidate Trump vs. Train-wreck Trump), the situation in the world is different, the media is different, even the people of the U.S. are different. I take each Democratic primary as a new and unique event. I don't "rehash". I investigate, evaluate, and determine who I think would best represent my interests in the context of those other things (the current world situation, etc.).

So, I have not yet been able to even begin to start my evaluation of everyone who has announced so far. But, I haven't eliminated anyone, nor will I, ever. I will learn as much as I can, and hone my aim, slowly but surely, at the candidate that emerges as my top choice. That is how we all should do it, IMHO.

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
111. good post
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:06 PM
Feb 2019

I would only add that animus towards any particular candidate at this stage is also unhelpful. And is unlikely to change a lot of minds.

Chicago1980

(1,968 posts)
110. Just like they didn't last time.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:04 PM
Feb 2019

If memory serves...

LisaM

(27,939 posts)
112. Does he want to divide the Democrats or have someone beat Trump?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:10 PM
Feb 2019

In my opinion, he can't do both and we're going to be right back to where we were. Any votes he siphons off will be Democratic - if he runs in the general as an Independent.

krkaufman

(13,461 posts)
125. Independent in the General ??
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:45 PM
Feb 2019

Where did Howard Schultz get inserted into the thread?

LisaM

(27,939 posts)
147. I could see Sanders staging a third-party run if he doesn't win.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:51 PM
Feb 2019

I don't think he gives a hoot about the Democratic party.

 

earthshine

(1,642 posts)
164. Bernie has said numerous times he will not EVER run for President as an Independent
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 10:05 PM
Feb 2019

precisely because it would split the Dem party.

Bernie views the Dem party as the ONLY means of stopping Republicans.

Your opinions are offered without any evidence.

no_hypocrisy

(46,770 posts)
176. Splitting democratic votes is likely why Trump appeared to be gracious when
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 06:53 AM
Feb 2019

Bernie announced his candidacy. He anticipates that Bernie would "go independent" and allow a re-election.

As usual, Trump has guessed wrong.

krkaufman

(13,461 posts)
124. What are you for?!?
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 06:43 PM
Feb 2019

Place just seems littered with posts/threads focusing on what people are against, rather than what they're for.

Build a better mousetrap, candidates ... and supporters.

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
143. Explain your position first before demanding others declare theirs.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:21 PM
Feb 2019

Only out of politeness?

sdfernando

(5,027 posts)
145. I am a Democrat
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 07:40 PM
Feb 2019

and I vote for Democrats, not rethuglicans, not greenies, not independents....DEMOCRATS.

If Bernie wants to be the nominee of the Democratic Party then he should change his registration and become a party member.

That being said, if by chance the Democratic Party nominates Bernie as our candidate for the Presidency, then I will vote for him....but he will not get a vote from me otherwise.

Little Star

(17,055 posts)
149. Yep! I'm with you 100%.
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:03 PM
Feb 2019

ProfessorPlum

(11,291 posts)
150. That's exactly the same as every other candidate
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:05 PM
Feb 2019

You'll vote for one. The rest you won't. I don't really care about your reasons. Sanders situation is therefore exactly the same as any other candidate who won't get your vote.

sdfernando

(5,027 posts)
167. I don't see it that way
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 11:17 PM
Feb 2019

I will carefully consider all of the Democratic candidates, weigh their positions and decide on which I like best.

I will give no such consideration to Bernie.

I don’t dislike Bernie. I think he has done some good things and moved the Democratic Party to the left. I think he still has good works in him. But I don’t think he should try to usurp the organization and resources of a political party he isn’t a member of. That’s not fairplay, not good sportsmanship so to say.

Gothmog

(147,718 posts)
160. Here are the DNC rule and oath
Wed Feb 20, 2019, 08:44 PM
Feb 2019

This is the actual rule that governs whether sanders can run as a member of the Democratic party https://www.thegreenpapers.com/P20/2019-01-03-2020_Call_for_the_Convention_12.21.18_w-attachments.pdf

The term “presidential candidate” herein shall mean any person who, as determined by the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, has accrued delegates in the nominating process and plans to seek the nomination, has established substantial support for their nomination as the Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United States, is a bona fide Democrat whose record of public service, accomplishment, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively demonstrates that the candidate is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States, and will participate in the Convention in good faith. At the time a presidential candidate announces their candidacy publicly, they must publicly affirm that they are a Democrat. Each candidate pursuing the Democratic nomination shall affirm, in writing, to the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee that they:

A. are a member of the Democratic Party;

B. will accept the Democratic nomination; and

C. will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party.

This requirement of written affirmation shall not supplant any necessary qualifications a candidate must satisfy at the state level, but is in addition to such affirmations required by individual states and territories. The written affirmation shall be done via an approved format by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee appended to this Call

There is an oath that sanders and other candidates will have to take
https://www.thegreenpapers.com/P20/2019-01-03-2020_Call_for_the_Convention_12.21.18_w-attachments.pdf
Presidential Candidate Written Affirmation

Pursuant to Article IV of the Call for the 2020 Democratic National Convention, I hereby affirm that, upon publicly announcing my candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States in the 2020 election, I am a member of the Democratic Party. I will run as a Democrat, accept the nomination of my Party, and I will serve as a Democrat if elected. I understand that signing this form does not supplant any legal or Party requirement by any state or territory to qualify for ballot placement in that jurisdiction.

Further, I acknowledge that in submitting this form to the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, I am subject to the provisions of Rule 13.K of the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2020 Democratic National Convention and Article VI of the Call for the 2020 Democratic National Convention that authorize the National Chairperson to determine whether a presidential candidate has established substantial support for their nomination as the Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United States, is a bona fide Democrat whose record of public service, accomplishments, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively demonstrate that the candidate is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States, and will participate in the Convention in good faith.
___________________

NOTARY AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF ______________
COUNTY OF _______________
I, ____________________________________, a Notary Public, do hereby certify that on this ____day of ___________________, 20____, personally appeared before me ______________________________, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and swore and acknowledged to me that they executed the same for the purpose and in the capacity therein expressed, and that the statements contained therein are true and correct. _______________________________________________ Notary Public, State of __________________ Name, Typed or Printed: __________________________________________ My Commission Expires: ___________________________

MrsCoffee

(5,803 posts)
177. That might be logical if there were no open primaries.
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 08:09 AM
Feb 2019

MaryMagdaline

(6,872 posts)
182. Agreed
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 10:08 AM
Feb 2019

Gothmog

(147,718 posts)
183. sanders has not yet signed the oath
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 11:12 AM
Feb 2019

Yonnie3

(17,639 posts)
187. Locking ...
Thu Feb 21, 2019, 05:17 PM
Feb 2019

Admin has asked that we lock all active primary threads in General Discussion.

If you like, please repost in the Democratic Primaries forum and continue there.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If Sanders not being offi...